Quality assurance for online adapted treatment plans: benchmarking and delivery monitoring simulation.

PURPOSE An important challenge facing online adaptive radiation therapy is the development of feasible and efficient quality assurance (QA). This project aimed to validate the deliverability of online adapted plans and develop a proof-of-concept online delivery monitoring system for online adaptive radiation therapy QA. METHODS The first part of this project benchmarked automatically online adapted prostate treatment plans using traditional portal dosimetry IMRT QA. The portal dosimetry QA results of online adapted plans were compared to original (unadapted) plans as well as randomly selected prostate IMRT plans from our clinic. In the second part, an online delivery monitoring system was designed and validated via a simulated treatment with intentional multileaf collimator (MLC) errors. This system was based on inputs from the dynamic machine information (DMI), which continuously reports actual MLC positions and machine monitor units (MUs) at intervals of 50 ms or less during delivery. Based on the DMI, the system performed two levels of monitoring/verification during the delivery: (1) dynamic monitoring of cumulative fluence errors resulting from leaf position deviations and visualization using fluence error maps (FEMs); and (2) verification of MLC positions against the treatment plan for potential errors in MLC motion and data transfer at each control point. Validation of the online delivery monitoring system was performed by introducing intentional systematic MLC errors (ranging from 0.5 to 2 mm) to the DMI files for both leaf banks. These DMI files were analyzed by the proposed system to evaluate the system's performance in quantifying errors and revealing the source of errors, as well as to understand patterns in the FEMs. In addition, FEMs from 210 actual prostate IMRT beams were analyzed using the proposed system to further validate its ability to catch and identify errors, as well as establish error magnitude baselines for prostate IMRT delivery. RESULTS Online adapted plans were found to have similar delivery accuracy in comparison to clinical IMRT plans when validated with portal dosimetry IMRT QA. FEMs for the simulated deliveries with intentional MLC errors exhibited distinct patterns for different MLC error magnitudes and directions, indicating that the proposed delivery monitoring system is highly specific in detecting the source of errors. Implementing the proposed QA system for online adapted plans revealed excellent delivery accuracy: over 99% of leaf position differences were within 0.5 mm, and >99% of pixels in the FEMs had fluence errors within 0.5 MU. Patterns present in the FEMs and MLC control point analysis for actual patient cases agreed with the error pattern analysis results, further validating the system's ability to reveal and differentiate MLC deviations. Calculation of the fluence map based on the DMI was performed within 2 ms after receiving each DMI input. CONCLUSIONS The proposed online delivery monitoring system requires minimal additional resources and time commitment to the current clinical workflow while still maintaining high sensitivity to leaf position errors and specificity to error types. The presented online delivery monitoring system therefore represents a promising QA system candidate for online adaptive radiation therapy.

[1]  B. McCurdy,et al.  The influence of a novel transmission detector on 6 MV x-ray beam characteristics. , 2009, Physics in medicine and biology.

[2]  W. Kwa,et al.  Monte Carlo based, patient-specific RapidArc QA using Linac log files. , 2009, Medical physics.

[3]  Steve B. Jiang,et al.  Dependence of fluence errors in dynamic IMRT on leaf-positional errors varying with time and leaf number. , 2003, Medical physics.

[4]  X Allen Li,et al.  Validation of an online replanning technique for prostate adaptive radiotherapy. , 2011, Physics in medicine and biology.

[5]  R. Cormack,et al.  Automatic online adaptive radiation therapy techniques for targets with significant shape change: a feasibility study , 2006, Physics in medicine and biology.

[6]  Alejandra Rangel,et al.  Tolerances on MLC leaf position accuracy for IMRT delivery with a dynamic MLC. , 2009, Medical physics.

[7]  James F Dempsey,et al.  Validation of dynamic MLC-controller log files using a two-dimensional diode array. , 2003, Medical physics.

[8]  M van Herk,et al.  Leaf position verification during dynamic beam delivery: a comparison of three applications using electronic portal imaging. , 2000, Medical physics.

[9]  He Wang,et al.  An automatic CT-guided adaptive radiation therapy technique by online modification of multileaf collimator leaf positions for prostate cancer. , 2005, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[10]  M C Kirby,et al.  Verification of dynamic multileaf collimation using an electronic portal imaging device. , 2000, Physics in medicine and biology.

[11]  R B King,et al.  Implementation of phantom-less IMRT delivery verification using Varian DynaLog files and R/V output , 2012, Physics in medicine and biology.

[12]  Raj Shekhar,et al.  Direct aperture deformation: an interfraction image guidance strategy. , 2006, Medical physics.

[13]  Dwight E Heron,et al.  A cone beam CT-guided online plan modification technique to correct interfractional anatomic changes for prostate cancer IMRT treatment , 2009, Physics in medicine and biology.

[14]  Vira Chankong,et al.  Comparison of online IGRT techniques for prostate IMRT treatment: adaptive vs repositioning correction. , 2009, Medical physics.

[15]  M. Dinesh Kumar,et al.  QA of intensity-modulated beams using dynamic MLC log files , 2006, Journal of medical physics.

[16]  Vira Chankong,et al.  On-line re-optimization of prostate IMRT plans for adaptive radiation therapy , 2008, Physics in medicine and biology.

[17]  C. Thieke,et al.  DAVID—a translucent multi-wire transmission ionization chamber for in vivo verification of IMRT and conformal irradiation techniques , 2006, Physics in medicine and biology.

[18]  Qiuwen Wu,et al.  Strategies for automatic online treatment plan reoptimization using clinical treatment planning system: a planning parameters study. , 2013, Medical physics.

[19]  Fang-Fang Yin,et al.  Adaptive prostate IGRT combining online re-optimization and re-positioning: a feasibility study , 2011, Physics in medicine and biology.

[20]  D. Low,et al.  A technique for the quantitative evaluation of dose distributions. , 1998, Medical physics.

[21]  Steve B. Jiang,et al.  GPU-based ultra-fast direct aperture optimization for online adaptive radiation therapy , 2010, Physics in medicine and biology.

[22]  Kai Yang,et al.  A real time dose monitoring and dose reconstruction tool for patient specific VMAT QA and delivery. , 2012, Medical physics.

[23]  Paul J Keall,et al.  First demonstration of combined kV/MV image-guided real-time dynamic multileaf-collimator target tracking. , 2009, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[24]  Paul J Keall,et al.  Detailed analysis of latencies in image-based dynamic MLC trackinga). , 2010, Medical physics.

[25]  E. Mok,et al.  Dose reconstruction for volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) using cone-beam CT and dynamic log files , 2010, Physics in medicine and biology.

[26]  He Wang,et al.  Use of deformed intensity distributions for on-line modification of image-guided IMRT to account for interfractional anatomic changes. , 2005, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[27]  Ergun E Ahunbay,et al.  Online adaptive replanning method for prostate radiotherapy. , 2010, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.